Uniloc USA, Inc. v. Apple Inc.

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 SAN JOSE DIVISION 7 8 UNILOC USA, INC., et al., Case No. 19-cv-01692-EJD (VKD)

9 Plaintiffs,

ORDER RE THIRD PARTY

10 v. SUBPOENA TO PENDRELL

11 APPLE INC., Re: Dkt. No. 90 Defendant. 12

13 Defendant Apple Inc. (“Apple”) and third party Pendrell Technologies LLC (“Pendrell”) 14 ask the Court to resolve their dispute concerning Apple’s subpoena for deposition transcripts and 15 deposition testimony from Pendrell. Dkt. No. 90. The Court deems this matter suitable for 16 resolution without oral argument. See Civil L.R. 7-1(b). 17 For the reasons explained below, the Court concludes that Apple may obtain discovery of 18 the transcripts of prior Pendrell depositions involving the same patent portfolio and ownership 19 history at issue in this case, and that Apple may take a single deposition of Pendrell for use in the 20 four Uniloc actions against Apple. 21 I. DISCUSSION 22 A. Deposition Testimony 23 On January…